THE UGLY PRESIDENTIAL RACE
Sometimes there seems to be very little to
choose between the two eccentric and aggressive candidates of the current
presidential race in the United States, which is derided in general as a
two-party oligarchy in the guise of democracy, with whoever comes to power
toeing the hard line of the powerful military-industrial cum financial crooks
who are in reality running the governments. But sometimes it also seems to be a
very crucial one which can decide even the fate of the entire world – as to
whether it would be pushed into a nuclear Armageddon by the warmongering
Killary clique, being supported by several republican neocons too, or be saved
from its brink by the no-war, no-intervention protagonists whom in general
Trump represents – as the reputed economists and political analysts like Paul
Craig Roberts and Stephen Lendman often assert. The contest has escalated to
typical American obscene proportions by the fishing out of a 11 year old locker
room chat of Trump’s infatuation with grabbing the ‘pussies’ and the counter
propaganda of Bill Clinton’s actual rapes and the ‘oral orifice’ proceedings as
also Hillary’s own fascination for the male organs. But as Paul Craig Roberts rightly rues, “What disturbs me about the importance attributed to Trump’s
sexual banter is that we have in front
of us the dangerous situation of the neoconservatives pushing for Washington to
attack Syrian and Russian forces in Syria and the chief Washington
propagandist, neocon Carl Gershman, calling
publicly for the US to “summon the will”
to bring regime change to Russia. The tensions between the two
nuclear powers are currently at all time highs, and this dangerous situation is
not a factor in the US
presidential election!” It is also said that “Both Trump and Clinton are more strongly disliked than any
nominee at this point in the past 10 presidential cycles. Clinton’s “unfavourability rating” is 55% and
Trump’s 65%.” That the Americans have to choose between “two flawed candidates” in a “campaign of ‘you may not like me, but you’ll like my
opponent less’.” Stephen Lendman is more forthright: “The prospect of
Hillary succeeding Obama should terrify everyone, an unapologetic war goddess
threatening everyone. Businessman
Trump would rather profit from relations with Russia than bomb it. Neocon hawk
Hillary risks waging potentially cataclysmic nuclear war. Which agenda do you
support? A simple choice. Wall Street, war profiteers, media scoundrels,
corporate pollsters, and bipartisan lunatics infesting Washington one-sidedly back a she-devil
whose extremism may kill us all.” Though the constraints of ‘choosing the
lesser evil’ may not be palatable always, this time your editor prefers to travel
with Paul Craig Roberts and Stephen Lendman. §§§
No comments:
Post a Comment